Sorry your browser is not supported!

You are using an outdated browser that does not support modern web technologies, in order to use this site please update to a new browser.

Browsers supported include Chrome, FireFox, Safari, Opera, Internet Explorer 10+ or Microsoft Edge.

FPSC Classic Models and Media / Urban model pack

Author
Message
JoshK
Retired Moderator
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 17th Jun 2003
Location:
Posted: 26th Feb 2005 03:11 Edited at: 26th Feb 2005 03:12
I found this at GarageGames. I haven't bought it yet, but it looks really good:
http://www.garagegames.com/news/7109


It comes in variable LOD, which is good, because the wireframes looked pretty high-poly.

WindowsXP Media Center Edition, Pentium 4 2.53 GHz CPU, 512 MB of RAM, GEForce4 MX 440
eek
14
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th Dec 2004
Location:
Posted: 26th Feb 2005 07:06
That does look good...too bad it costs money.

JoshK
Retired Moderator
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 17th Jun 2003
Location:
Posted: 26th Feb 2005 09:20 Edited at: 26th Feb 2005 09:26
Crap is always free. Don't you realize that your attitude about not wanting to spend money is the reason there is so little decent media for indy developer to use? If you paid an artist to make that set, it would probably cost about $2,000. The idea is that if a lot of developers shell out just a little money, we can have high-quality game content for us all. But no, you are too stingy to pay $20 for $2,000 worth of work.

I'm not affiliated with this artist in any way, but I would like to see him make some money...that way he'll make more sets.

WindowsXP Media Center Edition, Pentium 4 2.53 GHz CPU, 512 MB of RAM, GEForce4 MX 440
Noldor
14
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Jan 2005
Location:
Posted: 26th Feb 2005 09:41 Edited at: 26th Feb 2005 09:46
I don't see it the same way.
I think people are a bit to scared of picking
up a modeling tool and learning how to model
for themselves. That would give a greater variety in
peoples games. All games look alike when using
model packs. (except if your are the only one who
has bought that pack )
i encurage people to try out modeling themselfes
to see that it is not that hard.

EDIT : No offence intended to anyone.
I just want everyone to experience that special
feel of seeing your own 3d structures in action in
the game world.
eek
14
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th Dec 2004
Location:
Posted: 26th Feb 2005 12:55 Edited at: 26th Feb 2005 12:57
Well, I'm learning right now actually thanks to you Noldor. You showed me those great tutorials. Sorry Josh if you don't like that I don't like to spend money, but I don't have much of it. I still said they were great, but I can't buy it now. Maybe later. Sorry again for sounding snobbish/stingy/whatever.

Edit:
Also some of those things are a bit to generic/simple. There's a bunch of boxes and cylinders, which is like 5 clicks in a modelor, at least in my limited experience. Not to be mean or whatever again...I'm just sayin.

JoshK
Retired Moderator
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 17th Jun 2003
Location:
Posted: 26th Feb 2005 13:29 Edited at: 26th Feb 2005 13:30
Modeling is easy. Skinning is hard. I could model everything in that pack, but the textures take 3-4 times as long to make.

WindowsXP Media Center Edition, Pentium 4 2.53 GHz CPU, 512 MB of RAM, GEForce4 MX 440
eek
14
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th Dec 2004
Location:
Posted: 26th Feb 2005 14:26
Well, idk. I've made quite a few textures. A lot of it is just taking pictures. Plus modelling isn't really easy, just those things. Whatever the case I know the guy put a lot of work into it. I'm not trying to degrade it...

Cloud of Crows Studios
14
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Nov 2004
Location:
Posted: 26th Feb 2005 21:05
Quote: "Modeling is easy. Skinning is hard."


Thats probably the one reason that I really dig Cartography Shop. It makes skinning basic shapes so much easier.

I know I'm not really using it for it's intended prupose (level design), but it makes for a hella easy modelling program if you want to make & skin basic geometric forms.

I'm hoping you'll consider an upgrade path for those of us who purchased C4.
adr
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 21st May 2003
Location: Job Centre
Posted: 27th Feb 2005 00:50
Sorry, but I'm really going to have to agree with Josh here. Richard Davey should put a floating div on everypage which reminds people that "Good", "Easy to Use", "Powerful", "Well Documented" and "Free" are usually mutually exclusive. Cheers for the link. If I even half-believed that I can ever be bothered to finish a game, I'd be buying media too


Does this smell like chloroform to you?
JoshK
Retired Moderator
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 17th Jun 2003
Location:
Posted: 27th Feb 2005 01:06 Edited at: 27th Feb 2005 01:08
Cloud of Crows, skinning isn't just UV mapping. It's drawing metal edges and contours that fit the geometry you are trying to replicate.

You guys are talking in terms of what is "possible". I am looking at a set of model with consistent detail, hue, saturation, and polycount. It exists. Right now. Why don't you try making something like that, get back to us in six months, and tell us how theoretically easy it was?

WindowsXP Media Center Edition, Pentium 4 2.53 GHz CPU, 512 MB of RAM, GEForce4 MX 440
Jonny Ree
14
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Dec 2004
Location: Where your breath frezes in the summer
Posted: 1st Mar 2005 15:44
Josh, hum.. your current tone ist the one I'm expecting from a moderator.. I know you feel strongly about this.. but somehow I feel you're almost attacking people here insted of just trying to prove your point. What thats said though, I do in fact agree with you on this, and the pack looks great!. And the price is nice.

I do wanto encurrage people to try and model themselves though, sinse its a nice skill to have in the future. But if you havent modeled a while already, and want pro looking games.. packages like this is required.. or to hire an artist. A good modeled, mapped and animated model takes quite a bit of time to make, even static objects of this quality takes time, mainly because of textures. And one cant expect that for free. If you're serious about making great looking games.. think like this.. if you've got a job.. you have no excuse.. but sinse most users here are quite a lot younger.. everytime you go off to the store to buy a soda, or cady bar.. dont.. and if this happends a lot, it will not take you long to get a package like this.

sorry about all the extra lines not really needed to build up on this point.. but thats what happen when I start writing, and dont have the time to edit.

Laters
Van B
Moderator
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Oct 2002
Location: Sunnyvale
Posted: 1st Mar 2005 18:54
Looks like the work of a master, however I think that if your making freeware games, it's very understandable to not want to spend any money on it bar the essentials, that media is not essential. Anyone starting on a licensed FPSC game, like one that they intend to sell should be more concearned about using the best media available, and that always involves spending money.

Frankly though, all the best modellers are as greedy as they can get away with being - anything that can be sold is sold - and getting a good modeller to stick to a project that won't make them rich is an achievement. That sounds pretty damning I know, but it's certainly not targetted at anyone here. A big problem is well is that there's only a few really good freelancers doing this sort of thing, there's far too many pretenders out there trying to sell models that an amoeba could make, at least that media looks cool, looks like someone took a lot of care with it - unfortunately that's quite rare.


Van-B


It's c**p being the only coder in the village.
Cellbloc Studios
15
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 15th Mar 2004
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posted: 2nd Mar 2005 01:03
I believe it the Flintstones attitude, where as you try and "get rich quick" insted of invest the time and resources into creating a quality product.

I personally about 5-10k a year on media assets. A lot of them I don't even get to use and they sit on my hard drive somewhere...

It is all part of the business. You cannot expect to make something using free media, a $56 program that displays your free media and expect to make ANY money off of it. Usually, rule of thumb, the money you put towards your program you will not get back until after the first year. So, if you spend $56 total, don't expect to see it for 365 days.

Now, this ratio changes later on. Meaning product quality that you spent some money on last longer... therefore after the first year, you start showing a profit.

Do you think the people who made Half-Life 2 broke even yet? Not even close. They won't even get a paycheck for another 9 months.

I agree with JoshKlint for spending $20 a media is nothing *IF* you plan on sell your product. If you are just playing around, create *FREE* games for your friends and family (which is all you can do with FPSCreator now) then I agree with eek. The *SECOND* you decide to sell your product, you *REALLY* need to fork up some cold hard cash to have a product that can compete with anything.

-This...is my boomstick!
Richard Davey
Retired Moderator
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 30th Apr 2002
Location: On the Jupiter Probe
Posted: 3rd Mar 2005 05:22
Here's a different twist on this topic - has anyone ever considered the fact that 3D modelling programs are just not well designed? They might have evolved over the years to include an amazing array of features, but the way they fundamentally work is still stuck back in a design paradigm that came from the mid 80's and has barely evolved since. I don't believe that there is a single 3D modelling package out there that is genuinely "easy to use" when it comes to creating something more complex than a shiny sphere or crate. I guess most of the reason is that creating 3D on what is essentially a 2D platform (a monitor) just isn't "easy".

Cheers,

Rich

Two Worlds and in Between
Hot Metal and Methedrine
bigH
14
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 29th Jan 2005
Location:
Posted: 3rd Mar 2005 10:11
RICH have you tryed curvy 3d , its easy to use and can make some nice model - not free .
There is a demo you can download ,to see if it will run on your computer .

[href]www.curvy3d.com/download.html

Keep not your blind eye . Open your heart to what is offered .For YOU are not the final judge . bigH.
Cellbloc Studios
15
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 15th Mar 2004
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posted: 3rd Mar 2005 10:41 Edited at: 3rd Mar 2005 10:48
@Richard:

I am actually quite happy with Max. In about 5 min I can have a half way decent spaceship. Been using it for about 13 years now. I guess it is "easy" when you know how to use the tools that are given to you and understand that there is not "one" program out there that can do it all (like all the plugins I have for Max) and it is not the modeling program that makes the "cool" look of the model........

It's the texture.

-This...is my boomstick!
Coldnews
14
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 16th Nov 2004
Location: Liverpool
Posted: 3rd Mar 2005 17:16 Edited at: 3rd Mar 2005 17:17
I think Richard has a good point. but annoyingly doent offer a solution. The 3d modelling learning curve is massively steep. Thats what makesit even more annoying when you see someone have a skill for it. Like Noldor for example. Damn him!

www.ColdNews.co.uk - the worlds first solo band.
New coldnews single avalable from here
Van B
Moderator
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Oct 2002
Location: Sunnyvale
Posted: 3rd Mar 2005 17:57
Quote: "I am actually quite happy with Max"


Max is a bit like using a Ming vase to bang in a nail for me - I only ever use it for welding and the odd hierarchy animation to tidy up my finished meshes. For such an expensive piece of software, I gotta say it's very far from intuitive. I use Rhino3D a lot, which is a completely alien environment for low poly modelling as it's NURBS based - but the thing is, a NURB is a helluva lot more conceivable than a mesh. I tend to make my model as a angular nurb, cutting bit's out, extruding into shapes etc, before converting to a mesh.

If I was making a spaceship, I'd use Rhino3D to model it, Lithunwrap to UV map it, and Max to glue the wayward verts back together - and then after all that if I need to bone animate it I use CharacterFX. That seems like far too much messing around to me, considering the simplicity of .x models. I mean, if you understand memblock meshes, you'll know that each polygon needs 3 verts, which in turn need a position, a colour, a UV map location and it's normal vector. That's not a huge deal of information compared to the chaff that most modelling packages add. If someone came up to me and had'nt modelled before and had £4000 to spend, I'd tell them to put £3985 back in the bank and order Milkshape.
A WYSIWYG modeller for DBPro is in development, concentrating on what's important, not what the price tag demands.


Van-B


It's c**p being the only coder in the village.
Coldnews
14
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 16th Nov 2004
Location: Liverpool
Posted: 3rd Mar 2005 20:30
Quote: "A WYSIWYG modeller for DBPro is in development, concentrating on what's important, not what the price tag demands."

I'm hoping thats VanMesh. And I have a feeling it is...

www.ColdNews.co.uk - the worlds first solo band.
New coldnews single avalable from here
Nick Igoe
14
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Aug 2004
Location: Not in the Pub
Posted: 3rd Mar 2005 23:52
I could make any of those models for nothing and frequently put out requests for a team in the team request board, I would be more than willing to make these for any project that i find interesting.

I would not say everything out there for free is cr*p there are a few of us guys out there that can model very well ( I assume that you think I`m one of them by some of the comments I have recieved in the past ) however due to the cost of some packages used in making models it is not possible for everyone to just give them away, I even sell some of mine occasionally.

I actually agree with Rich that most modelling packages havnt changed, I actually first started 3D modelling on the Amiga with imagine, And it really isnt that much different, just a few more buttons and a different layout.

I also believe that people should just have a go at modelling, It really isnt that hard, After just a few basic tutorials any one could make any of those models above, You shouldn`t be put off by what looks like a complicated interface, Half the buttons on Max I don`t think Ive ever used. You can even get a copy of GMax for nothing now.

http://www.bansheestudios.com/img/bansheeMontage.jpg
AlecM
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th Aug 2002
Location: Concord, MA
Posted: 4th Mar 2005 10:06 Edited at: 8th Mar 2005 11:14
Quote: "Here's a different twist on this topic - has anyone ever considered the fact that 3D modelling programs are just not well designed? They might have evolved over the years to include an amazing array of features, but the way they fundamentally work is still stuck back in a design paradigm that came from the mid 80's and has barely evolved since. I don't believe that there is a single 3D modelling package out there that is genuinely "easy to use" when it comes to creating something more complex than a shiny sphere or crate. I guess most of the reason is that creating 3D on what is essentially a 2D platform (a monitor) just isn't "easy"."


Have to disagree on the well designed bit. Ease of use can only really come from simplification. Simplification is fine for people learning getting there grips on 3d, But I need flexability and power. aside from the very rare bug or crash I encounter, 3dsmax is the perfect modelling app for me.
True flexability really can't be simplified. I need to be able to manually define any shape I want without any input or guidance from the application. Most people who don't paint, model, sketch, sculpt... regularly don't realize that they really don't know what anything looks like. We all use symbols to represent objects in our head and those symbols are very abstract. Because of this real modelling really can't be parametric and the app can't do the work for you.

Quote: "I actually agree with Rich that most modelling packages havnt changed, I actually first started 3D modelling on the Amiga with imagine, And it really isnt that much different, just a few more buttons and a different layout.

I also believe that people should just have a go at modelling, It really isnt that hard, After just a few basic tutorials any one could make any of those models above, You shouldn`t be put off by what looks like a complicated interface, Half the buttons on Max I don`t think Ive ever used. You can even get a copy of GMax for nothing now.
"


There isn't anything even remotely impressive about the geometry of those models. Nor should there be, they are simple forms in real life. What sets them apart are the textures.

Cellbloc Studios
15
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 15th Mar 2004
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posted: 4th Mar 2005 22:19 Edited at: 4th Mar 2005 22:20
I agree.

The thing most people I don't think or realize is that it usually takes multiple applications to create a model. Just like VanB said:

Quote: "I'd use Rhino3D to model it, Lithunwrap to UV map it, and Max to glue the wayward verts back together - and then after all that if I need to bone animate it I use CharacterFX"


I also think he forgot to add his paint application, but with that you have a count of *Five* Programs you need to *learn * just to make a model. I'm guessing but that is close to $5k-7k in software applications alone.

And people wonder why there aren't more models out there for free....

-This...is my boomstick!
indi
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th Aug 2002
Location: Earth, Brisbane, Australia
Posted: 5th Mar 2005 10:55
i find all 3d programs that i have tried do not allow painting in "live 3d" except for a few.
if this feature was more robust and a package had tools very similar to photoshop for 2d editing then i would possibly be more interested in purchasing that package.

I agree with Rich to the point made about the layout of these packages.

If no-one gives your an answer to a question you have asked, consider:- Is your question clear.- Did you ask nicely.- Are you showing any effort to solve the problem yourself
JoshK
Retired Moderator
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 17th Jun 2003
Location:
Posted: 5th Mar 2005 23:59
Alec just schooled y'all.

WindowsXP Media Center Edition, Pentium 4 2.53 GHz CPU, 512 MB of RAM, GEForce4 MX 440
Van B
Moderator
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Oct 2002
Location: Sunnyvale
Posted: 7th Mar 2005 21:52
But it does'nt matter how much of a headlock Alec has over Max, because it's such a complex package that anyone without years to spend learning it is never gonna use a lot of the features.

Like if your only interested in making media for a DBPro game, why would you need the power of a program like Max - people have learned to model in an afternoon using Milkshape, those quick results are what's necessary for them to keep going and get the media for their game that they need so much.

Put a newbie in front of Max, and another in front of Milkshape and the milkshaper will always get more done more quickly.

Put a professional in front of each though, and the Maxer would humiliate the guy using Milkshape - this does'nt mean that either model would be better suited to a game though, that final .X model and texture are what's important, not the rigmarole inbetween.


Van-B


It's c**p being the only coder in the village.
Lakers Point Guard
14
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Apr 2005
Location:
Posted: 19th May 2005 18:32
So, if I want to start to learn how to model - which app should I be looking to use ?

Essentially, I'll just be looking to model for FPS games...

There's been some great work on these pages that I'd like to, at least "attempt" to emulate...

Login to post a reply

Server time is: 2019-06-20 09:58:30
Your offset time is: 2019-06-20 09:58:30